a statement like this leaves me flat — like trying to prove a negative quark exists, or telling someone all the Olympics are rigged
What I’ve mentioned in this thread and others are just my unproven hypothesis that relies on my own perspective on what I see, hear, and based on my somewhat limited perspective. This is also nothing against Trump, as I think he can actually accomplish something good.
What politics does Trump need to win at? I mean after all — he is the most powerful man in the world, aka POTUS?
He is indeed and it is a position of popularity and character, rather than politicking, which was Hillary and Barnie main approach. An approach they failed at (well, with Barnie, Clinton helped him fail, but that’s not the issue).
Getting elected and actually accomplishing something good are different. The former is based on popularity and logical argumentation, while the letter is based on maneuvering the political puddle.
Take for example the recent interview Trump gave for the NYT. He mentioned that he might not have chosen Jeff Sessions as the AG if he had known that he would later recuse himself. This could have two distinct meanings: on the one hand, he might mean that he expected Sessions to protect him during the investigation and on the other hand he might mean that he expected the AG to do his job even if it is an inconvenience to the POTUS.
The first is an accusation of the expectation of partisanship from the AG, which paints Trump in a very negative light, while the other is a case of being too open and too direct with the press, not foreseeing how his words might be later portrayed. Career politicians would not have taken the interview and even if they did, they would make sure to have scripted answers to any and all questions, restricting the ability of the press to take them out of context.
In essence, a good politician is someone who utilizes double-speak for the successful applications of his (or hers) own interests. Many of the Republicans who campaigned against Obamacare are now refusing to actually work to change it. It seems that they used voters to get into a position of power, imagining that they will never actually have to fulfill that promise.
And let’s not forget Clinton that no one to this day knows what she actually believes. Her utilizing identity politics, talking about the LGBT and other groups, saying she is a feminist, and having her campaign revolve around the idea that she has a vagina, is exactly what’s wrong in current day politics.
Washington politics be that way, but on the broader consideration of Trump and his interface with political practice, I think he is still well adapted to dealing with REAL politics, and not that fake shit practiced in Washington.
I once heard a business man saying that if the government was an actual business, it would have reached bankruptcy within two weeks. I think politics is counter intuitive to business. Though, I agree that using business sense in politics could remedy that situation.
It’s current day politics. People want their politicians to lie to them so that they could feel good about themselves, rather than accomplish anything of value. This is pretty much how Obama managed to get elected twice. He didn’t campaign on his merits but on the idea that “at least I’m a decent man” and portraying the opposition as evil, rather than incompetent or having flawed ideas.
During his campaign, Trump acted against the press, making his potential voters more important, something that annoyed them to no end and that was unprecedented (in modern times, at least).
As for the actual politicians, the Republicans don’t take him as the leader and only care about staying in their position, disregarding him as the head of the party and going against the promises they made while running for office. The Democrats, being insufferable twits, will do anything to go against him and for the most parts, he can’t do much with them, apart from exposing them to the public and maybe tricking them into acting against their party affiliation.
You can think about it like a game of chess. You move your pieces one by one, positioning them, and altering your gameplay based on the opponents moves, until the right time when you strike and win the game. This is pretty much what I mean by Trump needing to utilize politics for his own ends and beating his opposition.
Instead of saying that Mueller doesn’t need to look into his finances, he might comment the investigation are not concerned in finding anything and try to waste time, limiting the actions he could take, and giving the platform to Democrats for campaigning toward the 2018 congress election and that they’ll probably check his finances next, wasting tax payer time on nothing and of course, finding absolutely nothing. This is a better argument against that waste of time, giving the conclusion of such endeavor, and ultimately showing that he is right and that the entire investigation is a way to stop his policies.
He basically says the same but with more forethought and making his oppositions actions benefit him and his interests.
I think that the press and Democrats know this and the reason for attacking him from all directions, making his presidency more about protecting himself from accusations, rather than about making policies and advancing American interests.